LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4.1 Nano

Updated October 21, 2026. 58 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic
Coding
66.0
Overall
41.8
Output $/M
$25.00
58
GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
8.9
Overall
7.8
Output $/M
$0.40
0
vs boards won of 58 shared

Decision reading

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 for coding: it scores 66.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 8.9 for GPT-4.1 Nano.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano when output tokens cost 62.5x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 1M tokens.

Shared results
58
Claude Opus 4.8 only
68
GPT-4.1 Nano only
11
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Claude Opus 4.8 66.0 from 2 benchmarks, GPT-4.1 Nano 8.9 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Agentic work, 77.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ARC-AGI: Claude Opus 4.8 92.5% against GPT-4.1 Nano 0.0%, 92.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Claude Opus 4.8 $25.00 against GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 per million output tokens, 62.5x apart.
Context window
Claude Opus 4.8 takes 1M tokens, GPT-4.1 Nano 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8BarsGPT-4.1 NanoTies
Coding60
Intelligence20
Agentic work10
Reasoning110
Math30
Knowledge100
Web design60
General190
All shared boards580
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index60
Coding benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Aider polyglotNot measured8.9%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveBench coding77.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena WebDev1556Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
AA Coding Index74.311.1Claude Opus 4.8
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)87.8%42.7%Claude Opus 4.8
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)88.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)23.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)82.7%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Code migration (Vals AI)47.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)1.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)71.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)59.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured32.6%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SciCode54.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)58.3%3.8%Claude Opus 4.8
FrontierCode46.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
GSO-Bench47.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
WeirdML82.9%19.0%Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: coding14901306Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: software and IT14881305Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena WebDev: React1557Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1543Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Intelligence benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Intelligence Index41.87.8Claude Opus 4.8
Epoch Capabilities Index159.0129.5Claude Opus 4.8
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Agentic work benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AA Agentic Index41.9Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1233Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1249Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1222Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1237Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1231Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1238Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1221Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1227Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench research81.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench browser96.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench long agentic48.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)53.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)30.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)43.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)69.4%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)4.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)11.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom94.4%17.3%Claude Opus 4.8
APEX-Agents48.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Remote Labor Index8.3%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
OSWorld 2.020.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
DeepResearch Bench50.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
PostTrainBench33.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,787Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Search1204Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index110
Reasoning benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
GPQA Diamond92.4%50.8%Claude Opus 4.8
LiveBench reasoning89.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)86.6%55.0%Claude Opus 4.8
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)92.0%51.2%Claude Opus 4.8
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)48.7%3.8%Claude Opus 4.8
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.0%48.9%Claude Opus 4.8
ARC-AGI92.5%0.0%Claude Opus 4.8
ARC-AGI-272.1%0.0%Claude Opus 4.8
SimpleBench64.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Chess puzzles52.0%0.0%Claude Opus 4.8
Mystery game puzzles36.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
EBR-bench28.6%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14821286Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: expert15031271Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14871293Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision: diagrams1315Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1337Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
Math benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
AIMENot measured26.5%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)Not measured80.2%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)Not measured69.3%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Math IndexNot measured24.0Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured24.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME98.3%28.9%Claude Opus 4.8
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 380.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
FrontierMath, tier 456.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
ProofBench69.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MATH level 5Not measured70.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math14861274Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: mathematical work14971274Claude Opus 4.8
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index100
Knowledge benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
MMLU Pro89.6%63.5%Claude Opus 4.8
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.6%61.1%Claude Opus 4.8
CorpFin (Vals AI)66.7%42.1%Claude Opus 4.8
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.6%60.8%Claude Opus 4.8
MortgageTax (Vals AI)69.9%52.8%Claude Opus 4.8
MedQA (Vals AI)Not measured68.2%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)53.2%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured65.7%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified53.0%6.0%Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: science14771297Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14641276Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: legal and government14771300Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: business and finance14581267Claude Opus 4.8
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
Web design benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Design Arena: websites1258973Claude Opus 4.8
Design Arena: UI components1256916Claude Opus 4.8
Design Arena: game dev1264971Claude Opus 4.8
Design Arena: data viz1240891Claude Opus 4.8
Design Arena: 3D1223925Claude Opus 4.8
Design Arena: all code categories1255963Claude Opus 4.8
Design Arena: SVG1194Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1276Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LiveBench design78.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index190
General benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
LiveBench data analysis66.0%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)68.1%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)54.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)85.8%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Vals Multimodal Index70.9%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
IFBench62.2%32.0%Claude Opus 4.8
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)77.7%20.3%Claude Opus 4.8
DTBench94.9%52.5%Claude Opus 4.8
LMCA57.5%5.5%Claude Opus 4.8
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured25.0%Only GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Furniture assembly42.5%Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text14611285Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: instruction following14761266Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: creative writing14541260Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision12941063Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: English14681303Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: non-English14501260Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Chinese15061270Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: German14721288Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Japanese14421198Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Korean1431Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: French1481Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1465Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14741261Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: Polish1459Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14761277Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: longer queries14831283Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: writing and language14611261Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14401243Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision: English12931101Claude Opus 4.8
LMArena Vision: Chinese1346Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1303Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1282Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
LMArena Document1475Not measuredOnly Claude Opus 4.8 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 NanoLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Claude Opus 4.8$0.018Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.8$0.325Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0062Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Claude Opus 4.8$1.25Fits in one request
GPT-4.1 Nano$0.024Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 Nano
SpecificationAnthropic Claude Opus 4.8OpenAI GPT-4.1 Nano
MakerAnthropicOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMay 27, 2026April 14, 2025
Context window1M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$5.00$0.10
Output $/Mtok$25.00$0.40
Coding index66.08.9
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved task$2.17Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-4.1 Nano for coding?

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 for coding: it scores 66.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 8.9 for GPT-4.1 Nano. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano when output tokens cost 62.5x less, or when the context window is larger, 1.05M against 1M tokens.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4.1 Nano?

Claude Opus 4.8 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 and $0.40. Cost per solved task is known for Claude Opus 4.8 only.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4.1 Nano?

GPT-4.1 Nano, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks is the Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4.1 Nano comparison based on?

58 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Claude Opus 4.8's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and GPT-4.1 Nano's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next